Systems and methods for risk management in a geographically distributed trading system

ABSTRACT

A computerized trading system includes a master node and a plurality of regional nodes, the master and regional nodes each including a processor and memory, and where the master node is communicatively coupled to each of the regional nodes over a network. The master node and regional nodes are programmed to perform a method for updating limits for each of the regional nodes, where the master node maintains a global limit and a ratio representing a proportion of the global limit allocable to each of the regional nodes. The master node allocates to each regional node a local limit that is a proportion of the global limit in accordance with the ratio, and monitors the local limit utilization at each of the regional nodes. When the master node detects one or more events, the master node allocates a new local limit to one or more of the regional nodes.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent ApplicationNo. 62/333,395, entitled “Systems and Methods for Risk Management in aGeographically Distributed Trading System,” which was filed on May 9,2016, the entirety of which is herein incorporated by reference.

BACKGROUND

Brokers often provide clients access to financial markets. Clients ortraders enter orders into trading systems provided by brokers, and theseorders are electronically sent to an exchange for execution. Orders canbe entered in a variety of ways. For example, the client can call thebroker over the phone, and the broker can enter the order himself intothe trading system. The client can also send the order electronically tothe broker. In either case, the broker takes responsibility forexecuting the order within the price limits specified by the client.This can be a single execution, or the order can be worked over a periodof time and filled by a number of executions on the exchange. This isreferred to as Care order flow.

Alternatively, the client can send an order to be worked by an algorithmprovided by the broker. The algorithm is implemented within the tradingsystem of the broker, and is referred to as an Algo, of which many typesexist. An Algo takes in an order and determines how the order is to beexecuted on the exchange, by using predefined logic, input parameters,and live market data. The order can be entered electronically ormanually by the broker into the Algo. This is referred to as Algo orderflow.

The client or trader can also send an order directly to the exchange,without intervention by a broker or Algo. The order can be entered via ascreen provided by a broker or electronically into the trading system,which in turn routes the order to the exchange. This is referred to asDirect Market Access (“DMA”) order flow.

Global broker trading systems have been developed that provide clientsand traders access to global markets such as those located in the UnitedStates, Europe, and Asia. Usually the global trading system comprises anarchitecture of regional nodes that are located close to exchanges forlatency reasons. The regional nodes are separate systems (typicallylocated in separate data centers) that act and operate independently.The global system accepts orders from clients and traders(electronically or via a screen) for any exchange, where the underlyingarchitecture is transparent to the user. A client or trader can belocated in London, and can enter orders for the CME exchange (in the US)or Eurex (in Germany); from the user's perspective the experience is thesame and it would not be apparent to the user that orders have been sentto different regional nodes located in data centers thousands of milesapart. To a client or a trader there is a single access point to theglobal system, and the system routes orders to the relevant regionalnodes where they are sent to the relevant exchanges for execution.

Brokers typically subject their clients to pre-trade risk controls.These controls aim to minimize errors, for example mistyping andrepeated orders, but also aim to minimize credit risk for clients. Thetypes of checks include: maximum order size; value and price limits;daily value and position limits for the client or trader; and dailymargin limits for clients.

Margin is the amount of cash or collateral required by an exchangeclearing house for clients or brokers to enter into a listed derivativesposition. Margin limits involve brokers calculating the marginrequirements for listed Futures and Options (“F&O”) orders andpositions, and ensuring a client has enough cash or collateral to coverthe margin requirements for all new orders entered. Many trading systemswill perform margin checks using the exchange clearing house methodologyor some approximation thereof.

Daily value limits and margin limits are usually set per client orclient account regardless of what financial instruments are traded bythe client. For F&O trading systems, margin can be calculated for allinstruments across all exchanges and aggregated to a single requirement,validated against a single limit.

It is desirable that global trading platforms comprising regional nodesbe able to validate an order pre-trade and ensure its contribution to aclient's position will not exceed the global limit specified for aparticular client. Conventional techniques to achieve this end include(i) using a single entry point; or (ii) using a replication scheme.

Use of a single entry point includes validating all orders for aparticular client against a single total and limit maintained in onelocation. After validation the order is routed to the relevant node forexecution. However, in a multi-node system, it can be difficult to finda suitable location for the single entry point if clients are tradingmultiple markets. That is, for example, use of a single entry point canresult in a significant latency cost as the system performing the riskchecks may be located many thousands of miles from both the client andthe destination exchange.

Use of a replication scheme includes replicating the limit and totals oneach regional node, and validating orders at each node. However, thiscan result in so called “in-flight” risk, where two or more ordersentered by a client in quick succession to markets located in differentregions can result in the client breaching their limit, since each nodehas yet to be updated by the respective orders in the other nodes due tothe latency of replication.

Accordingly, improved techniques for risk management in a geographicallydistributed trading system are desired.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The presently disclosed subject matter provides techniques for ordermanagement and routing in a global trading system, including techniquesfor risk management among a plurality of trading nodes. In particular,the disclosed subject matter relates to techniques for managing globallimits in a global trading platform that improves latency and preventserroneous limit breaches, as described below. As used herein, the limitcan be any kind of aggregate limit, such as margin or consideration.

In one aspect of the disclosed subject matter, one of the regional nodesin a global trading system can be designated the master node. The masternode can receive the client limits and divide and distribute the limit(“splitting”) across the various regional nodes. In this way validationcan occur regionally instead of centrally, retaining latency benefits.Additionally, as embodied herein and unlike the replication approachthere is no possibility of in-flight risk.

The master node can split the limit across the various nodes using aparameter called the Split Ratio. The parameter can be defaulted suchthat the limit is split equally across each node. In certainembodiments, the parameter can be altered manually per client so that agreater proportion of the limit is allocated to a particular node, wherethe majority of trading may occur for that client.

The master node can be configured to continuously monitoring the usageof the client limit in each regional node, in real-time without userintervention. If and when a particular node begins to disproportionatelyconsume its available limit, compared to other nodes, the master nodecan rebalance the available limit across the nodes. The master node canattempt to keep the available limit on each node in the same proportionas the Split Ratio, by borrowing availability from low utilization nodesand granting to high utilization nodes. Any adjustments to the SplitRatio can also result in a rebalance. This process can be controlled andtuned such that rebalancing occurs at a frequency that ensuresmaximizing limit usage while reducing the overhead of excessive updateswhere acquiring and granting will provide marginal benefit.

According to one or more embodiments, a computerized trading system isprovided, whereby the system comprises a master node and a plurality ofregional nodes, the master and regional nodes each including a processorand memory, where the master node is communicatively coupled to each ofthe regional nodes over a network. The master node and regional nodesare programmed to perform a method for updating limits for each of theregional nodes, whereby the method comprises maintaining, at the masternode, a global limit and a ratio representing a proportion of the globallimit allocable to each of the regional nodes. The method furthercomprises allocating, by the master node to each regional node, a locallimit that is a proportion of the global limit in accordance with theratio and monitoring, by the master node, local limit utilization ateach of the regional nodes. The method further comprises detecting, bythe master node, one or more events and, responsive to the detection,allocating a new local limit to one or more of the regional node.

Further embodiments include a non-transitory computer-readable mediumthat stores instructions that, when executed by one or more processorsincluded in a master node and a plurality of regional nodes, cause theone or more processors to carry out the above method.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating a representative geographicaldeployment of a global trading system in accordance with an embodimentof the disclosed subject matter.

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram illustrating the components of anexemplary trading system in accordance with an exemplary embodiment ofthe disclosed subject matter.

FIG. 3 is a flow diagram illustrating a method for rebalancing based onnodal utilization in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of thedisclosed subject matter.

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram illustrating a method for rebalancing based onglobal limit updates in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of thedisclosed subject matter.

FIG. 5 is a flow diagram illustrating a method for rebalancing based onchanges to the split ratio in accordance with an exemplary embodiment ofthe disclosed subject matter.

Throughout the drawings, the same reference numerals and characters,unless otherwise stated, are used to denote like features, elements,components or portions of the illustrated embodiments. Moreover, whilethe disclosed subject matter will now be described in detail withreference to the figures, it is done so in connection with theillustrative embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Exemplary embodiments of the disclosed subject matter are describedbelow, with reference to the figures, for purposes of illustration, andnot limitation. It should be apparent, however, to those skilled in theart that many more modifications besides those described herein arepossible without departing from the concepts of the disclosed subjectmatter.

In one aspect of the disclosed subject matter, a trading system caninclude a plurality of trading nodes in a plurality of geographiclocations. Each geographic location can include a particular market orexchange. Each trading node can interface with a switching layer whichcan route requests associated with each of the exchanges to one or morenodes. Each node can also include an Execution Management System (EMS)which can be configured to perform pre-trade risk checks. The system canbe configured such that a client account can have a global margin limit.The system can dynamically split the client account's global marginlimit across the trading nodes based on a predetermined split ratio. Thesystem can then automatically monitor and dynamically adjust the marginlimit at each node. In this manner, the system can ensure that theglobal margin limit will not be breached while minimizing false positiveorder rejections without the need for manual intervention, whilemaintaining low latency.

In an exemplary embodiment, with reference to FIG. 1, a global tradingsystem in accordance with the disclosed subject matter can includetrading nodes in a plurality of geographic locations. Each geographiclocation can include a particular market or exchange. For example,trading node 210 can be located in New York (and associated with theChicago Mercantile Exchanges, or CME 211), trading node 220 can belocated in London (and associated with the London InternationalFinancial Futures and Options Exchange, or LIFFE 221), trading node 230can be located in Mumbai (and associated with the National StockExchange of India, or NSE 231), trading node 240 can be located in HongKong (and associated with the Singapore Exchange, or SGX 241), tradingnode 250 can be located in Tokyo (and associated with the Tokyo StockExchange, or TSE 251), and trading node 260 can be located in Sydney(and associated with the Sydney Futures Exchange, or SFE 261). One ofskill in the art will appreciate that although trading node 210associated with CME 211 is depicted in FIG. 1 as located in New York,such a trading node could also be located in another geographic region,such as Chicago, for example, where lower latency is desired.Additionally, one of skill in the art will appreciate that the locationsand exchanges depicted in FIG. 1 are exemplary, and that a variety ofother locations and markets/exchanges may be used. Each trading node caninterface with a global switching layer 201 which routes requestsassociated with each of the exchanges to one or more other nodes. Asshown in FIG. 1, each trading node can be configured to interface withone or more end user applications (270 a through 270 f) adapted forreceiving input from a user. The global switching layer 201 can beconfigured to cause each end user application to display an entry dialogcorresponding to the trading node on which the user's order will beprocessed.

Each trading node can include an Order Management System (OMS) and anExecution Management System (EMS). The OMS can be adapted to receive andmanage orders from a user's account. For example, the OMS can beconfigured to receive manual orders from a client and/or receivealgorithmic orders from a client, create one or more child ordersaccording to parameters received from the client, and forward the childorders to the EMS.

The EMS can be configured to perform pre-trade risk checks as describedherein and to transmit orders for execution on the exchange associatedwith the trading node. For example, the EMS can transmit child ordersreceived from the OMS for execution if risk checks are successful. Inone embodiment, the EMS can transmit orders for execution only if aclient account's margin limit for the trading node is not breached.Additionally, or alternatively, the EMS can be configured to receiveorders directly from a client in a case where the client has a directmarket access (DMA) arrangement. In this case, the EMS can also beconfigured to perform pre-trade risk checks and transmit the order ifthe client account's margin limit for the trading node is not breached.

As embodied herein, and in accordance with an exemplary embodiment ofthe disclosed subject matter, a client account can have a global marginlimit. This margin limit can be, for example, a Net Liquidity Value.Additionally or alternatively, the limit could also be any kind ofaggregate limit, including a consideration limit.

In accordance with an exemplary embodiment, and with reference to FIG.2, the client account's global margin limit can be split across two ormore of the trading nodes in the system. For example, the system can beconfigured such that the client or broker, e.g., using a graphical userinterface, can specify an initial split ratio indicating the percentageof the client's global margin limit that should be initially allocatedto each node. For purpose of illustration, and not limitation, thisvalue will be referred to herein as the initial local margin limit. Itwill be appreciated that, although description is made herein withreference to the client account's global margin limit, the limit couldalso be any kind of aggregate limit, including a consideration limit.

The EMS of each trading node (102 a, 102 b) can be configured to enforcepre-trade risk checks on a client account's local margin limit. One ofthe regional nodes in a global trading system can be designated themaster node, depicted in FIG. 2 as master node 101. Master node 101 canreceive client limits and divide and distribute the limit (referred toas “splitting” the limit) across various regional nodes. In this wayvalidation can occur regionally instead of centrally, retaining latencybenefits, without incurring in-flight risk.

The master node can split the limit across the various nodes using aparameter called the Split Ratio, which is depicted as Split Ratio 120in FIG. 2. This parameter can be defaulted such that the limit is splitequally across each node. In certain embodiments, Split Ratio 120 can bealtered manually by an end user so that a greater proportion of thelimit is allocated to a particular node, where the majority of tradingmay occur for that end user.

Master node 101 can continuously monitor the usage of the client limitin each regional node (102 a, 102 b), in real-time without userintervention. If and when a particular node begins to disproportionatelyconsume its available limit, compared to other nodes, master node 101can rebalance the available limit across regional nodes 102 a and 102 b.Master node 101 can attempt to keep the available limit on each node inthe same proportion as the Split Ratio by borrowing availability fromlow utilization nodes and granting to high utilization nodes. Anyadjustments to the Split Ratio can also result in a rebalance. Thisprocess can be controlled and tuned such that rebalancing occurs at afrequency that ensures maximizing limit usage while reducing theoverhead of excessive updates where acquiring and granting will providemarginal benefit.

In this manner, a trading system in accordance with the disclosedsubject matter can ensure that the account's global margin limit willnot be breached while minimizing false positive rejections, and canallow for trading in globally distributed systems where trading systemsare spread out over large geographical areas, while maintaining lowlatency without impacting trading platform functionality.

In accordance with one aspect of the disclosed subject matter, the EMSof each trading node is also configured to dynamically adjust the localmargin limit. As noted above, master node 101 can monitor limitutilization on all regional nodes. If a particular regional node isdeemed underutilized relative to other nodes, i.e., a regional node hasa greater proportion of limit availability than other nodes according tothe split ratio, the node's local limit can be reduced. As used herein,for purpose of explanation and not limitation, this is referred to asthe “acquire phase.” Master node 101 can monitor how much of a limit isnot granted (i.e., the difference between the global limit and eachlocal limit) and increase local limits according to local limitutilization. The acquire and grant phases, described in further detailherein below, can run independently and continuously.

In connection with an exemplary embodiment, the acquire phase can referto a set of operations that calculate how much a given global limitshould be distributed to each regional node. The acquire phase can lowera regional limit for the nodes which are determined to be underutilized.In certain embodiments, this phase can have a configurable “cooling off”period during which no acquires can be issued in response to limitparameter updates.

In accordance with an exemplary embodiment, the grant phase can refer toa set of operations that calculate how much a given global limit shouldbe distributed to each regional node and how much is currently notgranted. The non-granted portion can be the difference between theglobal limit parameter value and a sum of parameter values downloadedfrom regional nodes. This phase can then issue one or more parameterupdates which will aim to distribute the non-granted portion of theglobal limit to all nodes so as to bring the nodal limit parameterutilization into balance in accordance with each regional node's valueof the Split Ratio parameter.

As embodied herein, for purpose of illustration and not limitation, theacquire or grant phases can be triggered by one or more of the followingevents: nodal parameter underutilization, as illustrated in FIG. 3;global limit parameter updates, as illustrated in FIG. 4; or split ratioupdate, as illustrated in FIG. 5.

For purpose of illustration, and not limitation, balancing in accordancewith the disclosed subject matter can include arithmetic centered on thenotion of “global unutilized limit” value, referred to herein as“global-free.” As illustrated by the equations below, the global-freevalue can be the difference between the global value of a limitparameter and the sum of nodal utilization levels. For example, in aparticular node, if the “total required margin” value was 1000 and themargin limit value was 1500, there would be 500 of margin that couldstill be used before breaching the limit.

free_(nodal)=limit_(nodal)−utilization_(nodal)

free_(global)=limit_(global)−Σutilization_(nodal)

Each regional node's split ratio can be converted to a percentage of theglobal value that would optimally be distributed to that node, asillustrated by the equation below. The amount of global-free is what canbe “distributed,” so that each node has a local-free that is inproportion to its split ratio.

${percentage}_{node} = \frac{{ratio}_{node}}{\sum\limits^{\;}{ratio}_{node}}$

For example in a three node system, with a split ratio of 1:2:2, thepercentage of global for node 1 is 20%, and 40% for node 2 and 3.

Together, these values can produce a per-node out-of-balance equation,which produces a numeric value that would place the node back intoratio:

rebalance_(value)=free_(global)*percentage_(node)−free_(nodal)

This numerical value can reflect the difference between how much a nodeought to have free and how much it actually has free.

The actual limit parameter sent to each region can be what the totallimit should be for that region, to maintain its proportion of theglobal-free:

parameter_(new value)=free_(global)*percentage_(node)+utilization_(nodal)

For each parameter value that is lower than it was previously, atransaction can be issued to the given node setting it to the prescribedvalue (i.e., acquisition). When this has been affected and downloaded tothe master node, separate events will grant values by recalculatingrebalancing values for each node.

In the event that the global-free is negative, meaning a global limitbreach, alpha checks can be skipped and transactions will be issued toensure that all nodes are also in breach. For example, if one nodebecomes extremely over-breached due to a market event, the limits willbe distributed so as to ensure trading is halted in all regions.

Before an acquire phase is triggered, a value can be calculated for eachnode that represents its utilization level. This calculation is referredto herein as the nodal “alpha”:

${alpha}_{nodal} = \frac{\left( \frac{{free}_{nodal}}{{free}_{global}} \right)}{{percentage}_{node}}$

The nodal alpha can reflect the ratio of nodal-free to global-free as itpertains to the nodal-ratio. When any alpha is a configurable distancefrom 100%, the system can allow acquisition to occur.

In this manner, a trading system in accordance with the disclosedsubject matter can obviate the need for manual readjustment of localmargin limits, minimize the potential for order rejection, reduce theuse of system resources, and reduce complexity for the client.

In accordance with one aspect of the disclosed subject matter, the EMSof a particular trading node can be configured to hold an order if thelocal margin limit has been breached. For example, in the case where anorder is rejected at a particular node because the account's localmargin limit for that node has been breached, the account may haveavailable margin limit in other nodes of the system. If the other nodeshave sufficient availability, the order can be accepted. For example,the trading node can be configured to hold an order that might otherwisebe rejected, evaluate limit availability across the global system, anddetermine if sufficient availability exists to allow the order.

In this manner, limit usage in a global geographically distributedtrading system can be enhanced, eliminating the need for manualintervention or resubmission of orders and improving usability and timeto market.

In accordance with one aspect of the disclosed subject matter, ordersfor a particular client can be sent concurrently to both an OMS and EMSof a particular trading node. For example, the OMS system can managealgorithmic order flow and the EMS system can manage DMA orders andchild orders from the OMS for execution on the market. In connectionwith an exemplary embodiment, pre-trade risk checks for such orders canbe performed in both the OMS and the EMS. For example, and notlimitation, pre-trade risk checks can be performed at the OMS asdescribed herein to allow for orders to be managed at the parent level.Additionally and/or alternatively, the EMS can perform pre-trade riskchecks on the child orders and/or DMA orders.

In this manner, it is possible to send orders to both an OMS and EMSsystem concurrently where they are risk managed locally, such thatlimits are not breached in either system, while minimizing latency. Thiscan allow for orders to be managed at the parent level while maintainingrisk management for DMA orders.

For purpose of illustration, and not limitation, an example of thedisclosed subject matter is described below.

In this example, all limit validation occurs locally in each trading hub(or regional node) of a multi-hub trading platform. Since limits areglobal (a client or account has a single limit that applies to alltrading, regardless of trading hub) a mechanism in accordance with thedisclosed subject matter is provided to manage global limits, referredto as “split and borrow.”

Split and borrow includes dividing a global limit into local limits, sorisk validation in each hub is against a share of the global limit. Thiscan ensure that the global limit is not breached by trading in multiplehubs. In accordance with this example, the global limit is dividedaccording to a pre-defined ratio, referred to as the Split Ratio, whichis set per client and account. The Split Ratio is specified as aninteger per hub. For example, in a three hub system comprising Chicago,London and Hong Kong, the Split Ratio may be specified as shown in thetable below:

Hub Split Ratio Chicago 2 London 2 Hong Kong 1

That is, all global limits are divided in a 2:2:1 ratio across therespective hubs, i.e., Chicago is allocated 40% of the limit, London40%, and Hong King 20%. The default Split Ratio is 1 across all tradinghubs, i.e., the limit is allocated equally across hubs.

During the course of trading for a particular client or account, orderscan be entered such that the utilization on each hub does not match theSplit Ratio. In the case where a particular hub utilizes a greaterproportion of its local limit as compared to other hubs, the systemrebalances the local limits such that the remaining available balance iskept in proportion to the Split Ratio. Each local limit is adjusted asfollows:

Local Limit_(new value)=Available_(global)*Ratio_(hub)+Utilisation_(hub)

The new local limit is equal to the local hub's ratio of total availablebalance (from the Split Ratio) plus what the local hub has alreadyutilized. An example is shown in the table below for the Margin Limit,using the example Split Ratio above.

Global Chicago London Hong Kong Global Local Local Local Event limitAvailable limit Available limit Available limit Available Set limit10000 10000 4000 4000 4000 4000 2000 2000 Order 10000 9000 4000 30004000 4000 2000 2000 entry 1 CH @ 1000 margin Order 10000 8500 4000 30004000 3500 2000 2000 entry 2 LO @ 500 margin Order 10000 8000 4000 25004000 3500 2000 2000 entry 3 CH @ 500 margin Rebalance 10000 8000 47003200 3700 3200 1600 1600

In the above example following entry of order 3, the Chicago hub isover-utilized compared to London and Hong Kong. The system performs arebalance: the Chicago local limit is increased, and the London and HongKong local limits are decreased such that each local balanceavailability is in proportion to the Split Ratio.

Chicago local limit=8000*0.4+1500=4700.

London local limit=8000*0.4+500=3700.

Hong Kong local limit=8000*0.2+0=1600.

The local limit available balances are in proportion to the Split Ratio(3200:3200:1600=2:2:1).

As described above in connection with certain embodiments, certaincomponents, such as trading nodes 102 a and 102 b and master node 101,can include a computer or computers, processor, network, mobile device,cluster, or other hardware to perform various functions. Moreover,certain elements of the disclosed subject matter can be embodied incomputer readable code which can be stored on computer readable mediaand which when executed can cause a processor to perform certainfunctions described herein. In these embodiments, the computer and/orother hardware play a significant role in the systems and methodsdisclosed herein. For example, the presence of the computers,processors, memory, storage, and networking hardware provides theability for users to trade on multiple trading platforms in differentgeographical regions, without regard to where they are located.

Additionally, as described above in connection with certain embodiments,certain components can communicate with certain other components, forexample via a network, such as the internet. To the extent not expresslystated above, the disclosed subject matter is intended to encompass bothsides of each transaction, including transmitting and receiving. One ofordinary skill in the art will readily understand that with regard tothe features described above, if one component transmits, sends, orotherwise makes available to another component, the other component willreceive or acquire, whether expressly stated or not.

Further, the presently disclosed subject matter is not to be limited inscope by the specific embodiments herein. Indeed, various modificationsof the disclosed subject matter in addition to those described hereinwill become apparent to those skilled in the art from the foregoingdescription and the accompanying figures. Such modifications areintended to fall within the scope of the disclosed subject matter.

Although one or more embodiments have been described herein in somedetail for clarity of understanding, it should be recognized thatcertain changes and modifications can be made without departing from thespirit of the disclosure. The embodiments described herein can employvarious computer-implemented operations involving data stored incomputer systems. Furthermore, the embodiments described herein employvarious computer-implemented operations which can be adapted to be partof a computer system, the cloud, etc. For example, these operations canrequire physical manipulation of physical quantities—usually, though notnecessarily, these quantities can take the form of electrical ormagnetic signals, where they or representations of them are capable ofbeing stored, transferred, combined, compared, or otherwise manipulated.Further, such manipulations are often referred to in terms, such asproducing, yielding, identifying, determining, comparing, receiving,storing, calculating, or generating. Any operations described hereinthat form part of one or more embodiments of the disclosure can beuseful machine operations. In addition, one or more embodiments of thedisclosure also relate to a device or an apparatus for performing theseoperations. The apparatus can be specially constructed for specificrequired purposes, or it can be a general purpose computer selectivelyactivated or configured by a computer program stored in the computer. Inparticular, various general purpose machines can be used with computerprograms written in accordance with the teachings herein, or it can bemore convenient to construct a more specialized apparatus to perform therequired operations.

The embodiments described herein can be practiced with other computersystem configurations including hand-held devices, microprocessorsystems, microprocessor-based or programmable consumer electronics,minicomputers, mainframe computers, and the like.

As stated above, one or more embodiments of the present disclosure canbe implemented as one or more computer programs or as one or morecomputer program modules embodied in one or more computer readablemedia. The term computer readable medium refers to any data storagedevice that can store data which can thereafter be input to a computersystem—computer readable media can be based on any existing orsubsequently developed technology for embodying computer programs in amanner that enables them to be read by a computer. Examples of acomputer readable medium include a hard drive, network attached storage(NAS), read-only memory, random-access memory (e.g., a flash memorydevice), a CD (Compact Disc), a CD-ROM, a CD-R, or a CD-RW, a DVD(Digital Versatile Disc), a magnetic tape, and other optical andnon-optical data storage devices. The computer readable medium can alsobe distributed over a network coupled computer system so that thecomputer readable code is stored and executed in a distributed fashion.

Although one or more embodiments of the present disclosure have beendescribed in some detail for clarity of understanding, it will beapparent that certain changes and modifications can be made within thescope of the claims. Accordingly, the described embodiments are to beconsidered as illustrative and not restrictive, and the scope of theclaims is not to be limited to details given herein, but can be modifiedwithin the scope and equivalents of the claims. In the claims, elementsdo not imply any particular order of operation, unless explicitly statedin the claims.

Many variations, modifications, additions, and improvements can be made.Plural instances can be provided for components, operations orstructures described herein as a single instance. Boundaries betweenvarious components, operations and data stores are somewhat arbitrary,and particular operations are illustrated in the context of specificillustrative configurations. Other allocations of functionality areenvisioned and can fall within the scope of the disclosure(s). Ingeneral, structures and functionality presented as separate componentsin exemplary configurations can be implemented as a combined structureor component. Similarly, structures and functionality presented as asingle component can be implemented as separate components. It will beapparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications andvariations can be made in the method and system of the disclosed subjectmatter without departing from the spirit or scope of the disclosedsubject matter. These and other variations, modifications, additions,and improvements can fall within the scope of the appended claim(s) andtheir equivalents.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computerized trading system, comprising: amaster node and a plurality of regional nodes, the master and regionalnodes each including a processor and memory, wherein the master node iscommunicatively coupled to each of the regional nodes over a network,wherein the master node and regional nodes are programmed to perform amethod for updating limits for each of the regional nodes, the methodcomprising: maintaining, at the master node, a global limit and a ratiorepresenting a proportion of the global limit allocable to each of theregional nodes; allocating, by the master node to each regional node, alocal limit that is a proportion of the global limit in accordance withthe ratio; monitoring, by the master node, local limit utilization ateach of the regional nodes; detecting, by the master node, one or moreevents; and responsive to the detection, allocating a new local limit toone or more of the regional nodes.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein theone or more events detected by the master node comprise a change inlimit utilization at one ore more the regional nodes.
 3. The system ofclaim 2, wherein the method further comprises: determining, by themaster node, a difference between an unutilized portion of the locallimit allocated to one of the regional nodes and a proportion of anunutilized portion of the global limit, the proportion corresponding tothe global limit allocable to the regional node; and updating, by themaster node, the local limit allocated to the regional node based on thedetermined difference.
 4. The system of claim 3, wherein the one or moreevents detected by the master node further comprises the expiration of apredetermined time period during which the master node does not updateany of the local limits of the regional nodes.
 5. The system of claim 1,wherein the one or more events detected by the master node correspond toa change in the global limit, and wherein the method further comprises:determining, by the master node, a proportion of the change in theglobal limit for each regional node; and allocating, by the master node,a new limit to each of the regional nodes based on the determinedproportions.
 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more eventsdetected by the master node correspond to a change in the ratio, andwherein the method further comprises: determining, by the master node, anew proportion of the global limit allocable to each regional node; andallocating, by the master node, a new limit to each of the regionalnodes based on the new proportion.
 7. The system of claim 1, whereinglobal limit is one of a margin limit or a consideration limit.
 8. Anon-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, whenexecuted by one or more processors included in a master node and aplurality of regional nodes, cause the one or more processors to carryout a method of updating limits, the method comprising: maintaining, atthe master node, a global limit and a ratio representing a proportion ofthe global limit allocable to each of the regional nodes; allocating, bythe master node to each regional node, a local limit that is aproportion of the global limit in accordance with the ratio; monitoring,by the master node, local limit utilization at each of the regionalnodes; detecting, by the master node, one or more events; and responsiveto the detection, allocating a new local limit to one or more of theregional nodes.
 9. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim8, wherein the one or more events detected by the master node comprise achange in limit utilization at one ore more the regional nodes.
 10. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 9, wherein the methodfurther comprises: determining, by the master node, a difference betweenan unutilized portion of the local limit allocated to one of theregional nodes and a proportion of an unutilized portion of the globallimit, the proportion corresponding to the global limit allocable to theregional node; and updating, by the master node, the local limitallocated to the regional node based on the determined difference. 11.The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein the oneor more events detected by the master node further comprises theexpiration of a predetermined time period during which the master nodedoes not update any of the local limits of the regional nodes.
 12. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, wherein the one ormore events detected by the master node correspond to a change in theglobal limit, and wherein the method further comprises: determining, bythe master node, a proportion of the change in the global limit for eachregional node; and allocating, by the master node, a new limit to eachof the regional nodes based on the determined proportions.
 13. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, wherein the one ormore events detected by the master node correspond to a change in theratio, and wherein the method further comprises: determining, by themaster node, a new proportion of the global limit allocable to eachregional node; and allocating, by the master node, a new limit to eachof the regional nodes based on the new proportion.
 14. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8, wherein global limitis one of a margin limit or a consideration limit.
 15. A method ofupdating limits, the method comprising: maintaining, at a master node, aglobal limit and a ratio representing a proportion of the global limitallocable to each of the regional nodes, the master node beingcommunicatively coupled to the regional nodes over a network;allocating, by the master node to each of a plurality of regional nodes,a local limit that is a proportion of the global limit in accordancewith the ratio; monitoring, by the master node, local limit utilizationat each of the regional nodes; detecting, by the master node, one ormore events; and responsive to the detection, allocating a new locallimit to one or more of the regional nodes.
 16. The method of claim 15,wherein the one or more events detected by the master node comprise achange in limit utilization at one ore more the regional nodes.
 17. Themethod of claim 16, wherein the method further comprises: determining,by the master node, a difference between an unutilized portion of thelocal limit allocated to one of the regional nodes and a proportion ofan unutilized portion of the global limit, the proportion correspondingto the global limit allocable to the regional node; and updating, by themaster node, the local limit allocated to the regional node based on thedetermined difference.
 18. The method of claim 17, wherein the one ormore events detected by the master node further comprises the expirationof a predetermined time period during which the master node does notupdate any of the local limits of the regional nodes.
 19. The method ofclaim 15, wherein the one or more events detected by the master nodecorrespond to a change in the global limit, and wherein the methodfurther comprises: determining, by the master node, a proportion of thechange in the global limit for each regional node; and allocating, bythe master node, a new limit to each of the regional nodes based on thedetermined proportions.
 20. The method of claim 15, wherein the one ormore events detected by the master node correspond to a change in theratio, and wherein the method further comprises: determining, by themaster node, a new proportion of the global limit allocable to eachregional node; and allocating, by the master node, a new limit to eachof the regional nodes based on the new proportion.